This was 40 years ago. Nobody heeded his warning, or those who did were dismissed as conspiracy theorists.

In 1975, Senator Frank Church appeared on Meet the Press and raised serious concerns about the capabilities of the United States intelligence
community. As the chairman of the Church Committee, which was a senate probe into government intelligence activities, he notes the dual importance of
gathering data on potential enemies of the nation while respecting the privacy of American citizens. Though almost forty years have passed, the recent
controversy surrounding Edward Snowden makes these remarks as relevant as ever.

Yes, many people heeded many warnings, including presidents.
But guess what, nothing happens.
Nothing is going to happen today either, nor tomorrow.
Why?, because this is the cycle.
The cycle will continue on and when the people feel their rearends boiling, and only then, will something change because enough people will wake up
and realize they finally have something to die for.

Even with the Snowden thing, the vast majority will still dismiss this kind of warning as "conspiracy theory". Too much for the average American to
think about. Dangle a Big Mac and a TV in front of them and they will gladly tune out any such information. Were it leaked that the NSA was secretly
watching all citizens through their televisions every night it would still barely make a dent in the public's brain-dead apathy.

Back then to now, 40 years, everyone's been debating about whether the Gov't is listening to all of us (how, how much, who, etc...).

We now have confirmation that the Gov't is and has in fact been listening to all of our communications. All of it. For quite some time. The new
debate is about whether it's right or not, or whether we "care" or not.

It's no longer a conspiracy "theory", it's a fact.

The part that concerns me are the conspiracy theories almost no one is discussing: The new technologies that consume all this data and
respond to it.

The cycle will continue on and when the people feel their rearends boiling, and only then, will something change because enough people will wake up
and realize they finally have something to die for.

G,day mate. i have read similar to your above before and i have said much the same to people.
BUT. you have put it together very very well and i take my hat off to you bloke
i do have one worrying thought though. the finally having something to die for may prove to be too late for us
well down

The cycle will continue on and when the people feel their rearends boiling, and only then, will something change because enough people will wake up
and realize they finally have something to die for.

G,day mate. i have read similar to your above before and i have said much the same to people.
BUT. you have put it together very very well and i take my hat off to you bloke
i do have one worrying thought though. the finally having something to die for may prove to be too late for us
well down

Mr. Church said something to the effect of if a "dictator or tyranny" came to power, but this need not be the case at all for privacy to go out the
window. This is because what intelligence agencies are is essentially a government within a government. I mean there is little and sometimes
absolutely zero oversight. The American people don't know what these groups are doing? Heck, the rest of the government doesn't either to a large
extent. There are still politicians who would side with the people on these issues, believe it or not. Some politicians truly attempt to serve the
people. You can't please everybody all the time either, so sometimes when it may seem like a politician is not serving the interest of the people this
may not be the case.

Anyway, we need honest people who respect the Constitution to oversee any and all things intelligence agencies and the military do. They've had their
chance to be autonomous and they've shown that they cannot do it without endangering the rights of the populace, thus there needs to be oversight. In
a perfect world where these agencies obeyed the law this wouldn't be necessary.

This reminds me of Eisenhower warning the people about the military industrial complex. What we have today is just an extension of that, with the
power intelligence agencies have I mean. There are loopholes that basically give them a free pass. National security is the one pandered most often
nowadays, but when the person determining what is essential to national security has a vested interest in the case, obviously the system of
justification is broken.

This content community relies on user-generated content from our member contributors. The opinions of our members are not those of site ownership who maintains strict editorial agnosticism and simply provides a collaborative venue for free expression.